<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Proof in the Punch</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=proof-in-the-punch</link>
	<description>@TAC</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:36:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fran</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4056</link>
		<dc:creator>Fran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 23:02:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4056</guid>
		<description>This is what the US needs to do:

1.  Complete the Bin Laden execution mission
2.  Air lift all women and girls out of Taliban areas and leave the vile, rotten acid throwers to themselves.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is what the US needs to do:</p>
<p>1.  Complete the Bin Laden execution mission<br />
2.  Air lift all women and girls out of Taliban areas and leave the vile, rotten acid throwers to themselves.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas Schiro</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4052</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas Schiro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 18:02:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4052</guid>
		<description>The United States must do two things to kill/capture Bin Laden: 
1. Withdraw combat forces from Iraq. The occupation of Iraq is a recruiting tool for terrorists. Leaving Al-Qaeda without an excuse would greatly hamper with Al-Qaeda&#039;s operations. 
2. Cease the hostility between NATO and the Opium cartel in Afghanistan/Pakistan region. The cartel is loyal to whoever tolerates it, and when the US began persecuting it, the allegiance shifted toward the Taliban; however, if NATO ceases it drug war, the support for Al-Qaeda will dwindle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The United States must do two things to kill/capture Bin Laden:<br />
1. Withdraw combat forces from Iraq. The occupation of Iraq is a recruiting tool for terrorists. Leaving Al-Qaeda without an excuse would greatly hamper with Al-Qaeda&#8217;s operations.<br />
2. Cease the hostility between NATO and the Opium cartel in Afghanistan/Pakistan region. The cartel is loyal to whoever tolerates it, and when the US began persecuting it, the allegiance shifted toward the Taliban; however, if NATO ceases it drug war, the support for Al-Qaeda will dwindle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TomB</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4035</link>
		<dc:creator>TomB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 00:14:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4035</guid>
		<description>If the analysis Leon Hadar rendered of Obama a few threads back is correct, and it certainly seems to make a lot of sense out of the confusing evidence to date, Obama probably doesn&#039;t have any real well-formed &quot;end vision&quot; of what he wants in Afghanistan and Pakistan or how to get there. So in essence I wonder if he really meant to hint at any mailed fist underneath the velvet of his glove. Certainly vis a vis the arab/moslem world he very much seems to have been wanting to emphasize the velvet I think. 

One has to say also that the Afghanistan and especially the Pakistan situations are very troubling. Like Thom Meehan says in a way we simply have to keep going after bin Laden. And to pull out of Afghanistan totally—beyond denying us a base to do that—also is problematic given the nation-building rationale we (foolishly) gave for staying in there in the first place. 

I&#039;d be happy pulling out of Afghanistan totally anyway I think saying that our beef was simply with it harboring al Queda and so long as it refrains from same its internal affairs are its internal affairs. And go after bin Laden from elsewhere once in awhile, if for no other reason than to try to honor our duty to avenge our dead. 

But you have to admit that it has its downsides. Loss of that base to go against bin Laden, probable return of the Taliban and thus very possibly/probably al Queda too, loss of face for pulling out, loss of a  base on the border with Iran when who-knows-what might happen there and in any event perhaps removing what the Iranians might see as a restraining factor.... 

If anything Obama is going to find himself under fire from his Left staying in Afghanistan and whacking at Obama in Pakistan once in awhile. Seems to me he might benefit from some understanding and defense from the rest of us with what seems his obvious extemporizing there now.

The man&#039;s trying to feel his way forward through a very complex and dangerous situation. That strikes me as a better way forward than just the blind acting on simplistic cliche&#039;s and dogmas that seems to have been what our last Administration considered thoughtful decision-making.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the analysis Leon Hadar rendered of Obama a few threads back is correct, and it certainly seems to make a lot of sense out of the confusing evidence to date, Obama probably doesn&#8217;t have any real well-formed &#8220;end vision&#8221; of what he wants in Afghanistan and Pakistan or how to get there. So in essence I wonder if he really meant to hint at any mailed fist underneath the velvet of his glove. Certainly vis a vis the arab/moslem world he very much seems to have been wanting to emphasize the velvet I think. </p>
<p>One has to say also that the Afghanistan and especially the Pakistan situations are very troubling. Like Thom Meehan says in a way we simply have to keep going after bin Laden. And to pull out of Afghanistan totally—beyond denying us a base to do that—also is problematic given the nation-building rationale we (foolishly) gave for staying in there in the first place. </p>
<p>I&#8217;d be happy pulling out of Afghanistan totally anyway I think saying that our beef was simply with it harboring al Queda and so long as it refrains from same its internal affairs are its internal affairs. And go after bin Laden from elsewhere once in awhile, if for no other reason than to try to honor our duty to avenge our dead. </p>
<p>But you have to admit that it has its downsides. Loss of that base to go against bin Laden, probable return of the Taliban and thus very possibly/probably al Queda too, loss of face for pulling out, loss of a  base on the border with Iran when who-knows-what might happen there and in any event perhaps removing what the Iranians might see as a restraining factor&#8230;. </p>
<p>If anything Obama is going to find himself under fire from his Left staying in Afghanistan and whacking at Obama in Pakistan once in awhile. Seems to me he might benefit from some understanding and defense from the rest of us with what seems his obvious extemporizing there now.</p>
<p>The man&#8217;s trying to feel his way forward through a very complex and dangerous situation. That strikes me as a better way forward than just the blind acting on simplistic cliche&#8217;s and dogmas that seems to have been what our last Administration considered thoughtful decision-making.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas O. Meehan</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4031</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas O. Meehan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:31:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4031</guid>
		<description>Recreating Afghanistan in our own image was always a fantasy.  Killing Bin Laden and his immediate circle is necessary for two reasons.

The American public needs the cathartic resolution of knowing that the enemy who struck us at home is dead.  We owe it to the victims.  

The Muslim world sees vengeance as part of the principle of justice.  If we fail to pursue Bin Laden we admit his status as a righteous warrior.
  
The killing of civilians in the tribal areas is regrettable but inevitable given the use of guided weapons.  The locals would have more respect for us if we used spies, assassins, or even proxies than the cowardly manner of the Israelis, hiding behind our technology.  Of course we need to decide if the respect of Muslims is worth it.  

The central kernel of our dilemma is that a clash of civilizations is in progress and Bin Laden is not so much a bad Muslim as an extreme one.  So we can be dupes of the Israelis and go on a crusade.  Or we can pretend that there is no clash and that we are all brothers.  Or we can own our own Westerness and follow a policy of containment and where necessary, belligerence in the furtherance of limited attainable goals.  I think the  third option is necessary but in view of the decadence of our own culture and political class, it&#039;s unlikely.  

The absurdity of our current mentality is highlighted in todays news that a CIA Station Chief, and self proclaimed convert to Islam, is under investigation for date raping Muslim women.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recreating Afghanistan in our own image was always a fantasy.  Killing Bin Laden and his immediate circle is necessary for two reasons.</p>
<p>The American public needs the cathartic resolution of knowing that the enemy who struck us at home is dead.  We owe it to the victims.  </p>
<p>The Muslim world sees vengeance as part of the principle of justice.  If we fail to pursue Bin Laden we admit his status as a righteous warrior.</p>
<p>The killing of civilians in the tribal areas is regrettable but inevitable given the use of guided weapons.  The locals would have more respect for us if we used spies, assassins, or even proxies than the cowardly manner of the Israelis, hiding behind our technology.  Of course we need to decide if the respect of Muslims is worth it.  </p>
<p>The central kernel of our dilemma is that a clash of civilizations is in progress and Bin Laden is not so much a bad Muslim as an extreme one.  So we can be dupes of the Israelis and go on a crusade.  Or we can pretend that there is no clash and that we are all brothers.  Or we can own our own Westerness and follow a policy of containment and where necessary, belligerence in the furtherance of limited attainable goals.  I think the  third option is necessary but in view of the decadence of our own culture and political class, it&#8217;s unlikely.  </p>
<p>The absurdity of our current mentality is highlighted in todays news that a CIA Station Chief, and self proclaimed convert to Islam, is under investigation for date raping Muslim women.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Hogan</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4026</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Hogan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:07:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4026</guid>
		<description>I fail to see how taking out bin Laden accomplishes anything meaningful.  The al Qaeda movement isn&#039;t a hierarchical structure that can be eliminated by assassinating its figurehead.  The Israelis have been wiping out PA, Hamas and Hezbollah leaders for years.  What have they achieved beyond alienating themselves from most of the civilized world and radicalizing the opposition?

I doubt that those with enough influence in the Obama administration are willing to admit that Afghanistan (and now apparently Pakistan) is a lost cause and was never winnable in any traditional sense.  So we will squander more resources, kill more civilians, and create more terrorists in the Middle East, while turning our country into a police state.  It&#039;ll be just great for Boeing and Lockheed Martin.  The American taxpayer, as always, will get the shaft.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I fail to see how taking out bin Laden accomplishes anything meaningful.  The al Qaeda movement isn&#8217;t a hierarchical structure that can be eliminated by assassinating its figurehead.  The Israelis have been wiping out PA, Hamas and Hezbollah leaders for years.  What have they achieved beyond alienating themselves from most of the civilized world and radicalizing the opposition?</p>
<p>I doubt that those with enough influence in the Obama administration are willing to admit that Afghanistan (and now apparently Pakistan) is a lost cause and was never winnable in any traditional sense.  So we will squander more resources, kill more civilians, and create more terrorists in the Middle East, while turning our country into a police state.  It&#8217;ll be just great for Boeing and Lockheed Martin.  The American taxpayer, as always, will get the shaft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jenn</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4025</link>
		<dc:creator>Jenn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:43:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4025</guid>
		<description>Does he not realize that Iran and other nations like it are laughing at this. They hate Him as much as Bush or any other American.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does he not realize that Iran and other nations like it are laughing at this. They hate Him as much as Bush or any other American.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kelley Vlahos</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4024</link>
		<dc:creator>Kelley Vlahos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 18:31:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4024</guid>
		<description>Bob -- I meant &quot;breakthrough&quot; in the sense that Obama chose a foreign outlet -- Arab media -- for his first White House interview. I believe that, in itself, was unprecedented.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob &#8212; I meant &#8220;breakthrough&#8221; in the sense that Obama chose a foreign outlet &#8212; Arab media &#8212; for his first White House interview. I believe that, in itself, was unprecedented.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Angela</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4023</link>
		<dc:creator>Angela</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 18:02:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4023</guid>
		<description>(lol at your graphic!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(lol at your graphic!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philip Giraldi</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4022</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip Giraldi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:42:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4022</guid>
		<description>It is my opinion, based on no facts whatsoever, that Obama-Gates know that Afghanistan is unwinnable in any conventional sense.  They realize that the status quo is unsustainable even with more troops because the Europeans are about to pull the plug on their participation and Karzai&#039;s gang is so corrupt that it will never be able to take control of the country.  On the plus side they know that the drone strikes in Pakistan are killing many mid level al-Qaeda (and civilians).  My intel buddies tell me that Usama and his close advisers have been near misses on several occasions.  So Obama-Gates hope to hang on for a while and maybe get lucky and take out bin Laden.  At that point it will be time to declare victory and leave.  

Re the mailed fist metaphor, Obama has to be careful not to give the Republicans and also the Dem hawks any ammunition to use against him so he has to project national security tough and, for the same reason, one should not expect that he will actually be able to change anything in the near term.  It will be interesting to see how George Mitchell responds to the Israeli moves to end the truce with Hamas even as he arrives in the ME, in effect showing Mitchell who is boss.  Will he respond at all?

Also interesting to watch the internal Dem debate.  Juan Cole, who knows virtually everything there is to know about the Middle East and Central Asia vs. Taylor Marsh?  Taylor Marsh?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is my opinion, based on no facts whatsoever, that Obama-Gates know that Afghanistan is unwinnable in any conventional sense.  They realize that the status quo is unsustainable even with more troops because the Europeans are about to pull the plug on their participation and Karzai&#8217;s gang is so corrupt that it will never be able to take control of the country.  On the plus side they know that the drone strikes in Pakistan are killing many mid level al-Qaeda (and civilians).  My intel buddies tell me that Usama and his close advisers have been near misses on several occasions.  So Obama-Gates hope to hang on for a while and maybe get lucky and take out bin Laden.  At that point it will be time to declare victory and leave.  </p>
<p>Re the mailed fist metaphor, Obama has to be careful not to give the Republicans and also the Dem hawks any ammunition to use against him so he has to project national security tough and, for the same reason, one should not expect that he will actually be able to change anything in the near term.  It will be interesting to see how George Mitchell responds to the Israeli moves to end the truce with Hamas even as he arrives in the ME, in effect showing Mitchell who is boss.  Will he respond at all?</p>
<p>Also interesting to watch the internal Dem debate.  Juan Cole, who knows virtually everything there is to know about the Middle East and Central Asia vs. Taylor Marsh?  Taylor Marsh?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob</title>
		<link>http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/2009/01/28/proof-in-the-punch/comment-page-1/#comment-4020</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:02:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amconmag.com/blog/?p=1478#comment-4020</guid>
		<description>How &quot;breakthrough&quot; is the interview?  Bush gave two or three interviews with the network while president.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How &#8220;breakthrough&#8221; is the interview?  Bush gave two or three interviews with the network while president.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

